Hewitt v. United States
View Official PDFBelow are plain-language sections to help you understand what the Court decided in Hewitt v. United States and why it matters. Quotes are taken from the syllabus (the Court’s short summary at the start of the opinion).
Summary
A short, plain-English overview of Hewitt v. United States.
The Supreme Court reviewed whether the First Step Act's more lenient penalties applied to § 924(c) offenders whose sentences were vacated and required resentencing after the Act's enactment. Petitioners argued for retroactive application of the Act's penalties, but the Fifth Circuit initially disagreed. The Supreme Court reversed this decision, remanding the cases for resentencing under the First Step Act's provisions.
Holding
The single most important “bottom line” of what the Court decided in Hewitt v. United States.
The Court held that the judgment of the Fifth Circuit is reversed, and the cases are remanded.
Constitutional Concepts
These are the Constitution-related themes that appear in Hewitt v. United States. Click a concept to see other cases that involve the same idea.
-
Why Ex Post Facto is relevant to Hewitt v. United States
The case involves the retroactive application of the First Step Act's more lenient penalties, which is related to the prohibition on retroactively applying criminal laws to increase punishment.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Petitioners argued they were entitled to retroactive application of the Act's more lenient penalties because a vacated prior sentence is not a sentence that 'has . . . been imposed' for purposes of § 403(b).
-
Why Void for Vagueness is relevant to Hewitt v. United States
The case references a prior decision where the 'crime of violence' definition used for § 924(c) convictions was found unconstitutionally vague, impacting the resentencing.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)In 2019, the Court held that the 'crime of violence' definition the Government routinely used to support some § 924(c) convictions was unconstitutionally vague.
-
Why Procedural Due Process is relevant to Hewitt v. United States
The case involves procedural aspects of resentencing and the application of new sentencing laws, which implicates fair procedures.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)When the District Court held resentencings for the remaining convictions, petitioners argued that the First Step Act's 5-year—not 25-year—mandatory minimum penalties applied.
Key Quotes
Short excerpts from the syllabus in Hewitt v. United States that support the summary and concepts above.
The First Step Act eliminated this harsh mandatory minimum penalty.
Petitioners argued they were entitled to retroactive application of the Act's more lenient penalties.
The judgment is reversed, and the cases are remanded.
